Talk at J-P v B's valedictory conference

1. Mathematical Cultures and Outcome Inequality—Flanders
Dr Brendan Larvor

2. Flanders does really well in PISA 2003
Even compared with near neighbours
Average scores on
mathematical literacy for
secondary education
learners.
PISA2003 results
(Adapted from De Meyer, Pauly & van
de Poele, 2004, p.5)
Countries - mean - standard deviation

3. The figures from 2012 show almost exactly the same pattern
• The figure for the Dutch-speaking community of Belgium decreased slightly from 553 to 531.
• The first six positions are all taken up by Asian countries (four Chinese provinces plus
Singapore and Korea) with scores ranking from 631 to 538.
• The next five countries are ranked with a score of 536 to 523 (without statistical significance);
the Dutch-speaking community of Belgium is one of them with a score of 531.
• The Dutch-speaking community of Belgium is still ahead of its neighbours e.g. The
Netherlands (523), the German-speaking community of Belgium (511), France (495) Germany
(514) and the French-speaking community of Belgium (493).
• The figure for Belgium (the average of the three language communities) is 515.
The Dutch-speaking community of Belgium is still top of the European countries

4. But what about those inequalities?
Flanders is the European champion of this, too

5. The figures from 2012 show a similar pattern
Flanders is still at the top for the degree of inequality between natives and first-generation students

6. Language spoken at home makes a difference

7. Language spoken at home still makes a difference in 2012

8. UNICEF, 2016
The report ranks 41 EU and OECD
countries according to inequality of
income, educational achievement,
self-reported health and life
satisfaction.
The educational system of Flanders
confirms social inequality.
High-income countries

9. UNICEF, 2016
High-income countries

10. Theory 1: Ethnomathematics

11. Theory 2: Critical Mathematics Education

12. Theory 3: Bishop’s five levels of analysis
Cultural level. The overarching culture of the people, their language, their mathematics, their core
values. Evidence from research at the cultural level shows how different ethnomathematical ideas are not
necessarily related to similar societal structures.
Societal level. The social institutions of the society, their goals, and their values regarding
mathematics education.
Institutional level. The educational institutions’ values and the place of mathematics within them.
Pedagogical level. The teachers’ values and decisions, the classroom culture of mathematical
thinking.
Individual level. Individual learners’ values and goals regarding mathematics, and mathematical
thinking, which can differ markedly, and which do not necessarily follow the teachers’ values and goals.
The Mathematics Educator 2008, Vol. 11, No.1/2, 79-88
Where to look for the explanation of the Flemish data?

13. How to think about culture
• Not as distinct, discrete, fixed units e.g. the
Navajo culture, the Mundukuru culture, British
culture, etc..
• As a material-ideal pair: artefacts & practices ~
ideals
• As a mass-noun, not a count-noun
• As a task for the individual, not a property
• Why?
 It’s the truth!
 Allows change
 Allows recognition of shared values
(This is my bit)

14. Does any of this help?
Brendan Larvor
Reader in philosophy
University of Hertfordshire
b.p.larvor@herts.ac.uk
(This is your bit)